Archives

Too soon, too late: Understanding teenage relationship abuse through listening to young people’s voices

 

By Polina Obolenskaya and Annie Bunce, VISION Research Fellows

There is a growing recognition that children and young people experience harm in their romantic relationships, which often starts before they are 16 years old. Being on the cusp of adulthood makes teenage relationship abuse hard to spot, for both young people themselves and those who come in contact with them. While there have been some exemplary studies with young people in this area (e.g. by Barter et al. 2009; SafeLives), more research dedicated specifically to those under 16 is needed.

Therefore, we partnered with charity SafeLives and their network of young people who share a passion to end domestic abuse and tackle the social challenges facing today’s youth – the “Changemakers” – to run a consultation workshop with young people aged 18-25 who had experienced harm in intimate relationships when they were aged between 13 and 16.

The three overarching aims of this project were to gather young people’s perspectives on:

  1. The issues around providing effective support to young people with experience of abuse in romantic relationships, including its recognition, the complexities of help-seeking, and the adequacy of professional responses;
  2. The priorities for future research on teenage relationship abuse; and
  3. The appropriate methodological approaches for involving young people in this sort of research.

Our partnership with SafeLives and the Changemakers was at the heart of this project, they were instrumental in shaping the direction of the research from the beginning. We co-produced materials, the Changemakers facilitated the consultation workshop, we co-analysed some of the data, and their views informed how the findings were interpreted and written up. Having young people’s perspective challenged some of our assumptions and understanding, both of the topic and the research process itself. We worked collaboratively on a number of outputs, including an academic paper, a short report, an infographic, and presentations to a wide variety of audiences.

Below is a summary of some of our main findings from the project.

Harmful relationships are often difficult for young people to recognise

Young people told us that they thought it was difficult for those aged 13-16 to recognise harmful behaviours in teenage relationships. This is because these behaviours often become normalised- through peer groups, social media, popular culture and, for some, experiences of domestic abuse at home. Additionally, we heard that while young people might have recognised some behaviours as unhealthy at the time, they struggled to see the broader pattern or label it as abuse.

Professionals also struggle to identify harm in teenage relationships and their responses are inconsistent

Our participants described a range of experiences with various professionals, with the takeaway message being that responses to teenage relationship abuse are inconsistent. Some young people described teachers, police officers and support workers as people who listened carefully, took concerns seriously and made them feel supported. But at the same time, they had also encountered responses that felt dismissive or minimising, or they did not feel confident about approaching some professionals who might be able to help (e.g. teachers).

We found that the language used by the professionals was a barrier to identification of harm experienced by young people in their relationships, as well as its disclosure. Young people told us that when professionals use language and terms that they cannot relate to, it is harder for them to identify what is happening to them as abuse and/or it can discourage them from seeking help. We also heard that age-related stereotypes and a lack of awareness and understanding around abusive behaviours within teenage relationships further contribute to dismissive attitudes, with professionals attributing minimising labels, such as “teenage drama” to harmful behaviours. 

Young people want earlier intervention

Participants stressed the importance of earlier identification and intervention to address abuse in teenage relationships, particularly advocating for proactive efforts by teachers and schools. They also thought that changes in attendance, behaviour, or well-being should prompt teachers to investigate potential underlying issues. In fact, this inspired the project name, Too Soon, Too Late, which was developed by one of the Changemakers. The title reflects the experiences of teenagers who may struggle to access support at the point they really need it.

Our participants also acknowledged that the signs of abuse might be really difficult to spot. For example, they described how achieving good grades and appearing confident on the surface while struggling with significant difficulties in their relationships or home environment- what they referred to as the ‘good student’ stereotype- might lead teachers to assume they were OK.

Young people also told us how they think research could be done better

Participants described participating in research as potentially empowering and healing – being able to speak with others who had similar experiences helped some realise they were not alone. While our participants found participating in research rewarding in itself, they agreed that being renumerated is important, not only because it removes financial barriers but because it demonstrates that young people’s time and expertise are truly valued.

Young people told us that to ensure a more inclusive and intersectional understanding of teenage relationship abuse researchers need to actively engage a diverse range of participants, including those from marginalised communities, of different sexual orientations and gender identities, but also individuals who do not fit common stereotypes of victims-survivors of abuse and those without direct experience of abuse. They argued that researchers should proactively invite participation, via multiple streams, rather than relying on young people to seek out opportunities themselves.

Young people emphasised the importance of creating research environments that are safe, flexible and inclusive. They told us that they wanted a choice of different ways to participate, to receive clear communication and set realistic expectations, and to have opportunities to contribute to research after discussions had ended and they had had time to reflect on them. Language was again paramount here. Young people told us that for rapport to be built, for them to feel heard, and to enhance the overall quality of research, researchers need to speak to young people using their own language.

Another key message was that participation should not end at the end of data collection. Young people wanted to know how their contributions were being used and in what ways their involvement was making a difference. Being thanked, updated and shown the outcomes of research helped them feel like they had been part of something meaningful.

Conclusion

One of the strongest messages from this project is that to better understand young people’s experiences and help them, researchers and other professionals need to keep their eyes and ears to the ground and intervene early, provide a safe and inclusive environment for young people to share their stories, really listen to them and respond in their language, and take their experiences seriously. 

For further information: contact Polina at polina.obolenskaya@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photograph from Adobe Stock subscription

Domestic Violence and Abuse-Related Suicide: Evidence from Six Years of Irish Coronial Data

Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) and suicide are both major public health concerns, yet the relationship between them is less well understood. For people experiencing DVA, understanding their connection is key if support services and interventions are to respond effectively.

A new study, Domestic Violence and Abuse-Related Suicide: Evidence from Six Years of Irish Coronial Data, co-authored by Gemma Cox, Sarah Dangar, Katerina Kavalidou, and VISION researcher, Lizzie Cook, contributes new evidence to this emerging area of research. The study is the first in Ireland to examine the intersection between DVA and suicide using six years of national coronial data from the Irish Probable Suicide Deaths Study (IPSDS).

Using a mixed-methods approach, the study draws on coronial records of suicides to investigate the prevalence, circumstances, and characteristics where a link to DVA had been document. A total of 3622 cases of suicide were screened for evidence of DVA; of thse, 15 DVA-related suicides were identified, all of which were female. A series of composite narratives are used to highlight the complex interaction of factors shaping DVA and suicide.

The study highlights the importance of recognising DVA within wider suicide prevention efforts. However, it also raises important questions about how experiences of DVA are identified and recorded within coronial systems that investigates these deaths.

This paper will be of interest to researchers, clinicians, mental health professionals, domestic abuse practitioners, suicide prevention specialists, policymakers, coroners, voluntary and communtiy sector organisations, and others working across health, social care, and justic sectors.

To download the article in the Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine: Domestic violence and abuse-related suicide: evidence from six years of Irish coronial data

To cite: Cox G, Cook E, Dangar S, Kavalidou K. Domestic violence and abuse-related suicide: evidence from six years of Irish coronial data. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine. Published online 2026:1-8. doi:10.1017/ipm.2026.10220

For further information: contact Lizzie at elizabeth.cook@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photo by Steve A Johnson on Unsplash

Sexual violence along migration routes: A qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis

While all types of violence happen in the context of migration without state authorization, states have no directly tangible and clearly articulated incentives to protect migrants who travel in this way from violence. Migrants in transit, particularly those who travel informally without documents, are exceptionally vulnerable to exploitation from criminal gangs and smuggling networks, abuse by border forces, corrupt policing, and exposure to petty crime and violence during the journey.

The systems and structures that govern international migration without state authorisation create conditions of vulnerability for migrants, and sexual violence requires separate attention. Sexual violence in any context has unique causes and consequences and reporting follows distinct patterns, linked to different social meanings and gender dynamics. Thus, there is good reason for treating sexual violence differently from other more general forms of violence.

There is little or limited incentive for states to prevent sexual violence against migrants who might be travelling without authorization or be in the process of escaping adversity in their home state. These individuals who are not part of citizenry cannot easily call upon available mechanisms to report and seek support and retribution for crimes of sexual violence perpetrated against them. Yet, there is precedent to consider sexual violence an international ‘wrong’ and to advocate for the consolidation of action against it (for example in United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1825, which established sexual violence in conflict as warranting consolidated international action).

VISION researcher Alexandria Innes and Merili Pulleritis (City St George’s, University of London) conducted a systematic review and evidence synthesis to systematise and synthesize qualitative evidence of sexual violence experienced by migrants travelling without state authorization, during the course of their journeys. 

Their article, Sexual violence along migration routes: A qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis, finds that sexual violence is widespread in the context of migration without state authorisation, and structurally embedded feature of undocumented migration. Findings were grouped around the six themes of agency, economics, climate of violence, normalisation of violence, perpetrators, and gender.

Data showed that migrant women expressed agency by adopting preventative or protective measures against expected sexual violence, at times including engagement in unwanted sexual contact. Economic deprivation intersected with sexual violence during migration journeys, increasing risk of sexual violence. The most severe cases of sexual violence were not mitigated by money. In some cases sexual violence victimisation was considered to be the only available way to prevent deportation or death.

Sexual violence was severe and indiscriminate, and included forced witnessing, and forced sex act perpetration on other migrants. Sexual violence along migration routes is executed by various types of perpetrators, including organised and systematic perpetration by state agents such as border guards and police, and by smuggling and trafficking gangs. Sexual violence is also carried out by opportunists who are often migrants in transit, or people who reside along the route. Sexual violence is used against men, women, trans and non-binary migrants, and people of all ages, but there are important gendered differences in the experience of sexual violence before and during a migration journey.

Sexual violence along irregular migration routes is an urgent issue demanding a response. Sexual violence is structurally embedded in the governance of international migration, suggesting the need for significant systemic change. This problem requires dedicated attention and resources directed towards prevention and protection.

To download the article: Sexual violence along migration routes: A qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis

To cite: Innes, A., & Pullerits, M. (2026). Sexual violence along migration routes: A qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis. PLOS ONE, 21(8), e0355474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0355474

For further information: contact Andri at alexandria.innes@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photograph from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

Public expectations for effective First Responder communication

Effective public communication during Mass Casualty Incidents (MCI) is essential for safeguarding life, maintaining order, and sustaining trust in emergency responders. Yet, high-pressure, information-scarce environments make this communication challenging.

The mixed methods study, Insights into Public Attitudes for Effective First Responder Communication during a Simulated Mass Casualty Incident, developed by VISION researcher Darren Cook (City St George’s University of London) and colleagues, examines public preferences for communication from emergency services during MCIs, drawing on data from a large-scale immersive training exercise.

Participants either completed a structured survey assessing the importance of specific communication attributes (N = 217) or participated in qualitative interviews (N = 181). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of questionnaire data identified a broad dimension of desired communicative leadership, with a distinct directive-authoritative dimension emerging for Police and Local Authorities.

Thematic analysis of interview data identified four overarching communication principles:

  1. Communication Strategies
  2. Emotional and Psychological Support
  3. Proactivity and Efficiency
  4. Building Trust and Resilience

Findings converge on a central requirement: effective communication during MCIs must balance clear, authoritative direction with transparent, empathetic engagement. Members of the public expect responders to provide both honest prognostic information and reassurance that acknowledges emotional needs.

This work highlights the need for emergency services to adopt a nuanced communication model that integrates leadership, clarity, and emotional intelligence. Embedding these principles into training and operational doctrine may enhance public cooperation, trust, and resilience during future large-scale emergencies.

To download the article: Insights into Public Attitudes for Effective First Responder Communication during a Simulated Mass Casualty Incident

To cite: Cook, D., Waring, S., Humann, M. & Alison, L. J. (2026). Insights into Public Attitudes for Effective First Responder Communication during a Simulated Mass Casualty Incident. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/14685973.

For further information: contact Darren at darren.cook@citystgeorges.ac.uk

AI illustration from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

Doing co-analysis justice: Guiding principles

Our inspiration to create principles for co-analysis with those with lived experience of the criminal justice system stemmed from a previous participatory project which prompted conversation about the benefits and challenges of doing co-analysis ‘properly’. This project asked what does best practice look like and how can those with lived experience effectively take part?

Participatory or co-produced research is increasingly common. However, people with lived experience tend to be involved in the earlier and/or latter stages of research projects and less so in the nitty gritty middle stage. Therefore, VISION and Revolving Doors’ staff and lived experience team members collaborated to develop guidelines to inform the co-analysis process. These principles were created to support the flourishing landscape of research involving people with lived experience in the analysis and interpretation of results, equipping teams with guidance to facilitate meaningful and positive co-analysis.

The principles are organised into six themes:

  1. Supporting diversity in co-analysis
  2. Prioritise emotional safety and support
  3. Address power, hierarchy and tokenism to ‘level the playing field’
  4. Relationship building and team dynamics
  5. Training and shared learning
  6. Experiment with creative methods and outputs

Inspired by this last theme, accompanying the principles is a co-designed illustration that visually represents some of the ideas shared. The image is above and also available for download below.

This resource is for researchers, regardless of background and experience, and practitioners and managers who work with people with lived experience of the issues being studied. The principles will also be useful for those with an interest in teaching or training co-production methods, and anybody involved in the funding or ethical review of research projects embedding lived experience expertise.

We are keen to know how the principles work in practice. If you use them to guide your work, we warmly welcome feedback on how helpful you found them. Please let Annie know at annie.bunce@citystgeorges.ac.uk.

To read the guidance: Doing co-analysis justice: Guiding principles

To find out more about the project: Exploring guiding principles for ‘Doing Co-Analysis Justice’

To find out more about Revolving Doors’ work: Revolving Doors – Breaking the cycle of crisis and crime

With thanks to the following individuals and organisations who co-developed the principles:

  • Revolving Doors: Lauren, Anthony, Charlotte, Charlie, De’Qeon, Jeanette, Leigh, Lucy, Mark, Rimona, Tony and Warren.
  • Dr Annie Bunce, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
  • Dr Danica Darley, University of Sheffield
  • Dr Elizabeth (Lizzie) Cook, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
  • Dr Les Humphreys, VISION consortium, University of Lancashire
  • Professor Sian Oram, VISION consortium, Kings College London
  • Dr Polina Obolenskaya, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
  • Professor Sally McManus, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London

Illustration from Jenny Leonard Art

Disability and intimate partner violence in England: Gender stratified analyses

By Dr Ladan Hashemi, VISION Senior Research Fellow 

Disabled people are widely recognised as being at heightened risk of gender-based violence, and intimate partner violence (IPV) is one of its most common forms. Yet few prior random probability sample surveys in England have examined the full range of IPV (physical, sexual, psychological, and economic abuse) across different types of impairment, for both women and men. 

Existing research in this area has tended to rely on small, service-based samples rather than the general population, to focus on women only, and to treat “any IPV” as a single outcome rather than distinguishing between different forms of abuse. This matters because different forms of IPV have very different risk profiles and levels of visibility, and because without a general population sample of both genders, it isn’t possible to say whether disability affects men and women’s risk in the same way. 

To address this, together with my co-authors Dr Hannah Manzur, Dr Annie Bunce, and Professor Sally McManus, all VISION researchers, we used the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, a nationally representative survey of 7,546 adults in England, to examine the 12-month prevalence of four types of IPV among people with and without four types of impairment: physical health conditions, sensory impairment, learning impairment, and restricted activities of daily living (ADLs). We tested the same disability types and IPV types for men and women, using models adjusted for age, ethnicity, marital status, and socioeconomic factors. 

Disabled women had almost twice the odds of experiencing psychological IPV, and around two and a half times the odds of experiencing sexual IPV, in the past year compared to non-disabled women. No significant difference was found for physical IPV. Women with a learning impairment reported the highest rates of IPV overall (around one in five had experienced some form of abuse in the past year), and women with restricted ADLs were at particularly high risk of economic abuse. For men, using the same measures and models, we found no significant differences in IPV risk between disabled and non-disabled men. 

This gendered pattern is consistent with the wider evidence base on IPV, in which women experience more frequent and more coercive forms of abuse than men, and it suggests that disability compounds this risk specifically for women. Disabled women’s risk was concentrated in the less visible forms of abuse (psychological and sexual, rather than physical), which points to a real gap: safeguarding responses attuned mainly to physical harm may be missing much of what disabled women experience. Isolation, dependency on a partner for care, and barriers to disclosure are all likely to play a part. 

The lack of a significant association for men may reflect several factors. Our sample of disabled men reporting IPV was relatively small, particularly for sexual IPV, which widens the uncertainty around these estimates. Disability may also interact with stigma and barriers to disclosure for men differently than for women, and the broader evidence base on men’s experiences of IPV, disabled or not, remains much thinner than for women. Further research with larger samples of disabled men would help clarify this pattern. 

These findings support investment in violence prevention programmes specifically designed for disabled women, particularly those with learning impairments or multiple impairments, and highlight the need for routes to disclosure that don’t rely on abuse being physically visible. They also point to the importance of coordination between domestic abuse services, disability support services, and health and social care, particularly where a partner also provides care. 

To download the article: Disability and intimate partner violence in England: Gender stratified analyses of a probability sample survey

To cite: Hashemi, L., Manzur, H., Bunce, A. et al. Disability and intimate partner violence in England: Gender stratified analyses of a probability sample survey. BMC Public Health (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-28489-5

For further information, contact: Ladan at ladan.hashemi@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photograph from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

Temporal trends in teenage relationship abuse among Welsh adolescents

Teenage relationship abuse (TRA) includes physical, emotional and sexual abuse in young people’s intimate relationships and is a growing public health concern. TRA has significant associations with other risk markers including (cyber)bullying, sexting and substance use, as well as negative short and long-term health and social consequences. It affects young people under 16 but remains largely invisible in national data. This study examines temporal trends (a pattern in data that shows how something changes over time) in TRA prevalence among Welsh adolescents and the age gradient in TRA by school year group.

The research team, led by VISION Senior Research Fellow Ruth Weir (City St George’s UoL), and  her consortium colleagues, Niels Blom (University of Manchester) and Polina Obolenskaya (City St George’s) and Katy Barrow-Grint (City St George’s) and Edna Ogada and Honor Young (Cardiff University), provide the first temporal trends in TRA among under 16-year-olds.

Data from four survey years (2017, 2019, 2023, 2025) of the Welsh School Health Research Network (SHRN) Student Health and Wellbeing Survey (SHWS) were analysed, comprising 345,796 pupils aged 11–16 from all maintained secondary schools in Wales. TRA victimisation and perpetration were measured using six items.

The team’s analysis confirms that TRA victimisation and perpetration remain prevalent among 11- to 16 year-olds. TRA among adolescents in Wales increased between 2017 and 2023 before declining in 2025, with a mixed pattern. The exception is emotional victimisation which both rose faster and remained at increased levels. Across the four survey years, one in five pupils reported TRA victimisation and one in eight reported perpetration. All six TRA outcomes increased between 2017 and 2023 before declining in 2025.

By 2025, any victimisation and physical perpetration had returned to 2017 levels; emotional victimisation remained elevated; and other outcomes fell below 2017 levels. A key finding across all four survey years is the bidirectional nature of TRA in under 16s. Sole perpetration is rare, most perpetrators are also victims, which challenges a more simplistic victim/perpetrator binary. Study findings have direct implications for prevention – interventions that separate young people into victim and perpetrator groups may therefore be inappropriate for this age group. 

Recommendation

Universal intervention and support are needed before entering secondary school and whilst in attendence. Any intervention should recognise the bidirectional nature of abuse among this age group.

To download the article: Temporal Trends in Teenage Relationship Abuse Among Welsh Adolescents: Analysis of the Student Health and Wellbeing Survey, 2017-2025

To cite: Weir, Ruth and Blom, Niels and Obolenskaya, Polina and Ogada, Edna and Barrow-Grint, Katy and Young, Honor, Temporal Trends in Teenage Relationship Abuse Among Welsh Adolescents: Analysis of the Student Health and Wellbeing Survey, 2017-2025 (June 23, 2026). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=6982259

For further information, contact: Ruth at ruth.weir@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photograph from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

Measuring outcomes of safe accommodation: A rapid evidence review

Safe accommodation refers to safe, time limited accommodation for anyone escaping domestic abuse. It includes a range of settings such as refuge accommodation, specialist and dispersed accommodation, sanctuary schemes, and move-on or second-stage housing. In the short-term, support in safe accommodation provides immediate safety for victim-survivors fleeing domestic abuse, and, in the longer-term the aim is for victim survivors to be free from abuse and rebuild their lives.

The most recent national estimates from the Crime Survey for England and Wales showed that 3.8 million people aged 16 years and over experienced domestic abuse in year ending March 2025: 2.2 million females and 1.5 million males. The demand for safe accommodation for those experiencing domestic abuse persistently outweighs supply. Also, there is a shortage of safe accommodation and barriers to access for marginalised groups such as those with no recourse to public funds, or complex mental health and/or substance use need and/or disability access.

While existing evidence provides insight into demand and provision in the context of supported safe accommodation, it does not capture the outcomes experienced by survivors who access safe accommodation. Previous studies have highlighted the diversity and inconsistency of outcomes used to evaluate the impact of domestic abuse services on adults and children, and the need for a shared outcomes framework to develop a coherent national picture of what works.

In response, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) commissioned a study to assess the feasibility of establishing a shared outcomes framework for support delivered in safe accommodation. The first stage of the research was a rapid evidence review to synthesise outcomes measured to assess the impact of support for victim-survivors and their children provided in the context of safe accommodation, conducted by Dr Annie Bunce (City St George’s, University of London), Dr Katie Smith and Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa (University of Bristol).

The review constitutes a targeted update and extension of a recently published scoping review of outcomes used to measure the effectiveness of domestic abuse support services conducted by VISION researchers (Carlisle et al., 2024), which identified 426 outcome measures across 80 studies. The current rapid evidence review was restricted to forms of supported safe accommodation, the original searches were updated to include studies published from June 2022 onwards, and barriers to and facilitators of implementing a shared outcomes framework were also reviewed. Seven academic databases were searched alongside three grey literature databases and 164 organisational websites. To be included, papers were required to be UK specific, published in English and focused on interventions delivered within safe accommodation. For the outcomes element of the review, papers were only included if they reported empirically measured outcomes (i.e., outcomes based on data collected and analysed by the authors, rather than purely theoretical, proposed, or assumed outcomes). 

Across the 17 reports meeting the inclusion criteria, outcomes clustered around three core domains: safety, wellbeing, and empowerment, which map broadly onto the Domestic Violence and Abuse Core Outcomes Set. Safety outcomes were the most frequently reported, followed by mental health and psychological wellbeing, while empowerment outcomes such as independence and confidence appeared less consistently. Service-level indicators such as length of stay and move-on destinations were also widely reported but fall outside existing frameworks.

This finding that outcomes measured in the context of safe accommodation broadly cluster around three core domains of safety, wellbeing and empowerment indicates some convergence in how impact is conceptualised. However, outcomes are measured inconsistently across services, with considerable variation in what is captured and how. Furthermore, significant barriers remain to implementing a shared outcomes framework. Developing a consistent approach to outcome measurement could strengthen accountability and support learning across areas.

Recommendations

  1. Frameworks should allow for the capture of relational and subjective aspects of recovery not easily measured through conventional quantitative indicators.
  2. Any national framework must be supported by appropriate data systems, training and analytical capacity to avoid placing additional burden on frontline staff and further disadvantaging smaller (particularly by-and-for) organisations and victim-survivors from marginalised communities.
  3. Future research should focus on further development and validation of measurement tools suitable in the context of safe accommodation, with particular attention to the relevance/meaningfulness of outcomes for victim-survivors themselves. Coordination between research teams is needed to avoid duplication and ensure data collection is harmonised between stakeholders.

To download the rapid evidence review: Measuring Outcomes of Safe Accommodation: A Rapid Evidence Review 

To download the main research report: Domestic_Abuse_Safe_Accommodation_Main_Research_Report.pdf

AI illustration from Adobe Photo Stock subscription

5th VISION annual conference: Presentations and illustrations now available

The fifth VISION annual conference was held on 7 July at The Light Auditorium in Friends House. The theme was Violence prevention in dialogue: Research and Policy.

After five years of research looking at violence prevention and the resulting health inequalities and focusing on improved measurement, policy, and practice, and delivering through a strong cross-sector partnership, we showcased our research in partnership with stakeholders Refuge, High Trees, Migrants’ Rights Network, Gloucestershire police constabulary, and Revolving Doors. In addition, we invited those working in violence prevention to critically assess our contributions and identify where further research and prioritised focus are required.

Jo Todd of Respect and Professor Gene Feder, VISION Director, reflected on 25 years of working in violence prevention as frontline practitioners and researchers. Drawing on their extensive experience, they highlighted both the progress made and the challenges that remain. While collaboration between government, academia, and the third sector has improved, longstanding silos—particularly across the health and criminal justice sectors—persist. Overcoming these barriers requires sustained commitment to relationship-building and cross-sector working.

They noted that significant progress has been made in violence prevention policy, including the publication of the government’s Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy last year. However, there remains considerable interest in how the incoming Prime Minister will take forward the Labour government’s commitment to halve violence against women and girls within a decade, and what this will mean for future policy, practice, and investment.

Professor Liz Kelly from London Metropolitan University was our 2nd keynote speaker and shared her thoughts on the language and naming of violence in the 21st century. Liz highlighted that  language changes not just what we say but what we know and recognise. The words we use in the field as researchers, analysts, policymakers, officials, and practitioners matter and should be clear and grounded in victim / survivor agency and freedom.

VISION research was highlighted in three symposiums:

  • Insight: Key findings on definitions and measurement within violence prevention
    • Dr Vishal Bhavsar (Kings College London) and Professor Miranda Horvath (University of Suffolk) presented on intimate partner violence perpetration.
    • Dr Madeleine Janickyj (University College London) and Emma Pickering (Refuge) presented on technology facilitated abuse.
  • Inclusion: Violence prevention research with marginalised populations
    • Dr Alexandria Innes (City St George’s UoL), Aya Khedairi (Migrants’ Rights Network) and Professor Gargi Bhattacharyya (University College London) presented on insecure migration status. Andri and Aya discussed their project, Understanding Violence: the risks for migrants with rising far-right fascism and the resulting output, Workbook: Migrant Community Insights on Building Safety. Gargi highlighted how the far right is misusing genuine work and research and that media discussion of VAWG frequently descends into racism and incitement.
    • Dr Annie Bunce (City St George’s UoL) and Lauren Bennett and Anthony Donohoe from Revolving Doors presented their work on developing principles for co-analysis with Lived Experience.
  • Involve: A look at two ongoing, impactful pieces of VISION research with partners
    • Dr Elizabeth Cook (City St George’s UoL) and Harry Jenkins (High Trees) presented their collaborative research developing Built on Trust, a report with youth from Lambeth in London on the role of youth spaces and trusted adults in reducing young people’s exposure to violence.
    • Dr Ruth Weir (City St George’s UoL) and Sophie Jarrett (Gloucestershire Police) presented on their system-wide partnership with central and local government, police, education trusts, and the third sector to understand and prevent teenage relationship abuse (TRA). This work has resulted in the establishment of a national group on TRA and a local group wtihin Gloucestershire.

VISION co-Deputy Directors, Professor Sally McManus (City St George’s UoL) and Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa (University of Bristol) closed the conference by reflecting on the achievements of the VISION consortium and outlining priorities for the future of violence prevention research, policy, and practice. Sally highlighted the wide range of datasets, tools, resources, and publications developed by VISION over the past five years. Looking ahead, Estela emphasised the need for further research on violence affecting LGBTQI+ communities and minoritised women and children. She also stressed the importance of breaking down the persistent silos between the health and criminal justice sectors, noting that the impacts of violence extend across both systems. Effective prevention and support therefore require joined-up services, coordinated policies, and cross-sector collaboration.

Visual artists, Abigail and Chloe Baldwin, from Buttercrumble, beautifully captured the day in a series of illustrations which can be downloaded below along with the keynote and symposium presentations.

To download the presentations:

  1. Insight Symposium: Insight Symposium_Perpetrators of IPV; Insight Symposium_Tech Abuse
  2. Inclusion Symposium: Inclusion Symposium_Insecure migration status; Inclusion Symposium_Co-design of analysis principles
  3. Involve Symposium: Involve Symposium_Partnering with young people; Involve Symposium_Teenage Relationship Abuse
  4. Professor Liz Kelly, 2nd Keynote: Keynote 2_The language and naming of violence
  5. Professor Sally McManus, VISION Achievements: VISION achievements

To download the illustrations:

  1. Conference Summary
  2. 1st Keynote – Jo Todd and Gene Feder and 1st Keynote – 2nd illustration
  3. 2nd Keynote – Liz Kelly
  4. Insight Symposium – Data and Definitions
  5. Inclusion Symposium – Marginalised Populations
  6. Involve Symposium – Partnerships
  7. VISION Achievements
  8. Violence Prevention in Dialogue

We keep each other safe – a guide for migrants in the UK

 

A negative shift in how migrants, including refugees and people seeking asylum, are viewed in the UK has been documented in research, including VISION work, and media. Rhetoric about migration has become more aggressive and emboldened racist demonstrations and attacks on asylum accommodation.

VISION partnered with Migrants’ Rights Network (MRN) to co-develop a research project with migrants that maps experiences of harm and identifies community-led safety strategies. The research centred on two cities, London and Belfast, working with communities who have experience of the asylum system / no recourse to public funds. Through a series of focus groups and workshops, migrants shared their experiences of far-right violence, and how they are already keeping themselves and each other safe. ​

The project brings together MRN’s narrative work, which actively challenges disinformation about migration, while trying to better understand and document the impact of hostile language on people currently in the immigration system.

The key findings and themes​ of the research are:

  • Impact on mental health and change in behaviours ​
  • Role of the state in making migrants unsafe, and low trust in institutions​
  • Everyone is experiencing it, but no one is talking about it​
  • We keep each other safe – what are we already doing, and what else can we do together

These insights coalesced into a free workbook available for downloading on the MRN website. The practical guide is for migrants in the UK co-developed with migrants and migrant-led organisations. It features shared knowledge, scenarios, and messages of solidarity.

To download the free resource: We keep each other safe workbook: Migrant community insights on building safety

For further information on the VISION – MRN collaboration, please see the blog, Understanding Violence: The risks for migrants with rising far-right fascism, written by Aya Khedairi, MRN Community Engagement Manager.

AI photo from Adobe Stock subscription